Is the business case for sustainability settled? That depends on which of this week’s reports you read.

New polls point to corporates splurging on sustainability, but even Race to Zero isn’t quite convinced the business case is there yet

Companies in the US have published just 432 sustainability reports so far this year. 

That’s nearly half the number issued during the same period last year, according to corporate membership body The Conference Board. 

It’s perhaps unsurprising, given the political pressure on companies in the US to ditch environmental and social objectives. 

But two other recent reports suggest the climbdown is superficial: that companies still see sustainability as a business opportunity, they’re just not talking about it anymore. 

A poll of 400 executives at US firms found that 87% had maintained or increased their investment in “business sustainability” so far this year.   

But nearly a third said they were simultaneously reducing public promotion of those investments.   

According to EcoVadis, the consultancy that undertook the research, “most companies still see sustainability as a competitive advantage”. 

The Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), formerly the Institute of Sustainability and Environmental Professionals, echoed this conclusion this week. 

While not all of IEMA’s 800+ members come from the private sector, half of them (48%) said budgets for “sustainability and environmental functions” were increasing, and less than 2% reported a negative change. 

The remainder claimed spending had been maintained.  

“While current macro-economic and geopolitical influences may be putting pressure on businesses to deprioritise sustainability, this has not (at the time of asking) had an impact on budgets,” wrote IEMA.    

But if the business case for sustainability is solid, one of the world’s largest climate initiatives didn’t get the memo.  

Race to Zero, which counts more than 12,000 companies among its members, quietly released its latest progress report last month.   

Direct Scope 1 emissions had risen for 27% of the 700+ members it surveyed, with businesses “struggling to balance growth with decarbonisation”.  

“Although the business case is getting stronger, we still have insufficient evidence to truly integrate climate concerns into business and investment decisions,” said Race to Zero.  

It called for more case studies on “the return on investment and value creation of climate action”.  

Blurry definitions may be a factor in the mixed conclusions. 

It’s important to note that EcoVadis did not explain what companies meant when they said they were investing in “business sustainability”, and ISEP didn’t specify what counted as “sustainability and environmental budgets”.  

In response to feedback from the market, this week also saw the UK government abandon plans to develop a taxonomy that would have defined green corporate spending. 

While this week’s research provides some hope that it’s only marketing and communications that have waned, Race to Zero’s progress report suggests the problem might be more profound.  

And it seems that, even if companies are willing to ramp up their sustainability spending, they aren’t keen on defining what that entails

Note: this article was updated after publication to correct the spelling of EcoVadis.